Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Corral heading to IR


Floppin
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't think the interest in Mayfield had anything to do with Matt Corral. It likely had everything to do with Sam Darnold.

The plan for Corral was always to sit him a year.

This.. They've been saying this for a while now.. Some ppl refuse to listen... Analysts were saying this during pre draft and some ppl refuse to listen.. The League said this during the draft and ppl refuse to listen..

At this point you can't blame the coaching staff for you having hyped up expectations.. They told you this was their plan the whole time...

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't think the interest in Mayfield had anything to do with Matt Corral. It likely had everything to do with Sam Darnold.

The plan for Corral was always to sit him a year.

I agree 100%.  I think we might have seen some of Corral towards the end of the season if we were out of contention, but other than that, the only way he was going to see significant playing time this season was due to injury.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't think the interest in Mayfield had anything to do with Matt Corral. It likely had everything to do with Sam Darnold.

The plan for Corral was always to sit him a year.

IMO the timing suggests otherwise. Seems like we wanted to assess where Corral was in his development to see if he could legit compete for the job and when it was clear he was nowhere near ready then we shifted gears to go get Mayfield.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

IMO the timing suggests otherwise. Seems like we wanted to assess where Corral was in his development to see if he could legit compete for the job and when it was clear he was nowhere near ready then we shifted gears to go get Mayfield.

Yeah if Corral was even close to “challenging” Darnold we would have probably stayed put. He clearly isn’t so we got Baker (who I’m kind of high on). 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

IMO the timing suggests otherwise. Seems like we wanted to assess where Corral was in his development to see if he could legit compete for the job and when it was clear he was nowhere near ready then we shifted gears to go get Mayfield.

They were trying to get Mayfield before during and they finally got the deal they wanted before TC.. But their actions dictated they were going to bring a VET to compete with Darnold no matter what Corral looked like..

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Martin said:

If we would have had an unquestionable starter, like all other teams with rookie QBs, Corral would have gotten more snaps in practice. But since we have cluster fxxk at QB, and are trying to decide who should be the starter in game 1, that is the priority, as it should be.

Corral has all the physical attributes of a long term starter, outside of being a bit injury prone, but he was deemed as not ready due to his college system. He was always a long term play. Not sure what is confusing about this.

Agreed about the cluster fxxk we have at the QB position.  However, Rhule could have made time to get Corral some legitimate snaps over PJ.  In fact, I don't see, other than Rhule's love affair with PJ, why PJ is still on the roster at all.  

Rhule and Co. knowing they were going to have this imaginary QB battle should have gone to Camp with only 3 QBs and made sure the rookie had a chance to get some valuable rep.  Who really knows he could have shown more than what he has.

Corral in his 2nd shot at QB was leaps and bounds better than his first shot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

IMO the timing suggests otherwise. Seems like we wanted to assess where Corral was in his development to see if he could legit compete for the job and when it was clear he was nowhere near ready then we shifted gears to go get Mayfield.

This is a fair assumption, and I dont think its too farfetched. The whole "wait a month" thing was a bit too timely.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

They were trying to get Mayfield before during and they finally got the deal they wanted before TC.. But their actions dictated they were going to bring a VET to compete with Darnold no matter what Corral looked like..

It seems like we were keeping tabs on the situation and keeping dialogue open and then after rookie mini-camp we significantly ramped up the active pursuit. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

I doubt this injury.  I think it is a move by Rhule to save PJ from being cut.  For whatever reason Rhule did not want Corral to see action this year.  It showed in his treatment of Corral from the get go.

If we end up in the top of the draft we will draft another QB and have wasted a 3rd round pick for Corral.  

Rhule has turned this franchise into a freaking circus. 

conspiracy-big-bang-theory.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, I'm not saying it's definitely correct. I'm just putting two and two together and making a leap in assumption.

It just seems if not playing Corral was the plan from the get go, we would have closed the deal with the browns one month sooner to get Baker in during OTAs. I know we can lean into Rhule is dumb. However, I wouldn't dismiss the notion that Corral playing this year went out the window when they got a glimpse of him at rookie camp.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

It just seems if not playing Corral was the plan from the get go, we would have closed the deal with the browns one month sooner to get Baker in during OTAs. I know we can lean into Rhule is dumb. However, I wouldn't dismiss the notion that Corral playing this year went out the window when they got a glimpse of him at rookie camp.

Yep. Pretty much what I'm thinking.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It seems like we were keeping tabs on the situation and keeping dialogue open and then after rookie mini-camp we significantly ramped up the active pursuit. 

The fact that the deal was still being discussed before during and after drafting Corral.. Let's me know Matt C performance in a rookie Mini camp had no bearing on the original plan..

Then looking at Rhule situation makes it even clearer iIMO.. No rookie in this draft was coming in and saving his job. He needs wins not another development season..

Edited by WOW!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Drafting a WR in the 1st only guarantees one of T-Mac, Coker, or the new draft pick has zero chance of still being on the roster 4 years from now because they can’t all be paid at the same time. Which is why a WR in the 1st makes no sense, if we do that, I’d be pissed if we don’t also trade Coker this offseason, and I have zero interest in trading him, so……… We know T-Mac is that dude, so unless the team has serious concerns about Coker taking the next step, WR makes so sense to me in the 1st
    • We read each other and we bring together influences from a variety of sources--that is what makes this time of year great.  However, when you realize that the Panthers have talked to three (3) WRs expected to be there around #19, it must give us pause. We all knew about Cooper (who has been heavily mocked to the Jets at #16) and Concepcion (deemed to be the perfect Z WR based on his skill set).  Then the other day, the Panthers quietly brought in another tall WR that seems to be less than a good fit at first glance. First, a glance at the top 2 WRs the Panthers have shown interest in: Cooper (projected to Jets at 16--could possibly go as early as 9) Concepcion (considered to be a perfect fit for the Z WR (leaving Coker in the slot and TMac at X) has one major issue that has plagued the Panthers (see Legette, Xavier, TMac) in the area of drops.  Coker, on the other hand has never dropped anything in his entire life--including "in" or "by."  He can't even eavesdrop.   So, does that stat about Concepcion bother them?  It does me.  XL dropped 14% of his catchable balls as a rookie.  Last year, he found new ways to screw up, such as not knowing the boundares or lateralling to Rico for a big loss.  Yes, TMac was ROY and was terrific, but he had 8 drops, catching just under 60% of targets. Top NFL WRs are in the 70%-80% range--which is good news--it means that TMac can improve.  He caught 70 passes and dropped 8, meaning that his drop rate was about 10%.  If you are counting, Denzel Boston is another first-round WR whose stock may have dropped a bit because he did not run a 40 during his pro day.  However, I see him as the #3 or #4 WR in this draft.     Most people feel that Denzel Boston is in the TMac mold--a tall X.  Many of the same criticisms (about separation and speed) face Boston now. Although he is primarily viewed as a physical X (split end) receiver due to his 6'4", 212-pound frame, Boston has a weakness that makes him less valuable as the X but more valuable as a Z. Boston's ability to get off a jam at the LOS has been questioned--something an X does nearly every play. While his size and contested-catch ability make him a prototypical X, scouts and analysts note he has the versatility to move across the formation, including taking snaps in the Z or as a big slot, often helping to create mismatches. This would make him interchangeable with Coker.  Even if Legette does not come around, the Panthers would have a three-headed hydra at WR.  For much of last season, the Panthers had TMac, a goofy XL, and Versatility: Beyond being an X receiver, he is considered capable of playing Z or in the slot, allowing for movement across the formation. Physicality: With his size and strength, he can play on the outside, making him a strong red-zone target. Role Projection: While he primarily played on the boundary, his profile fits as a versatile receiver who can align in multiple spots to exploit matchups.  His 6-foot-4 height and 209-pound weight are ideal for an outside receiver who can play both X and Z positions at the next level.   NFL Combine write-up:  Two-year starter with elite ball skills that should supersede athletic/speed limitations. A Puka Nacua comparison might feel strong, but like Nacua, Boston enters the draft with speed/separation concerns and outstanding competitive toughness. Boston gets off the line with good burst and maintains his top speed throughout the route. He could have issues beating press, but releases can also be schemed. He’s very skilled when it comes to winning jump balls and contested throws. Boston also knows how to win in the red zone. Acclimating to NFL competition could take a year, but Boston has the makeup to become a productive possession target with above-average red-zone value.   The Panthers have looked at three Z WRs who will be first-rounders in all likelihood.  They have a proven track record of bringing in first-round picks.  The tea leaves are strong in this case.   here is Greg Cosell talking to the Bills analysts.  What he says about Boston (compares to TMac) is interesting (4:45).  https://www.buffalobills.com/video/greg-cosell-breaks-down-wr-draft-class-buffalo-bills Screen Shot:  No share available. "I don't think you have to just line him up inside (slot).  I think you can play him outside (X)."  That comment suggests he can play X, slot, or Z.  He then compares KC Concepcion vs. Boston--very different WRs.  In my view, Boston is more versatile.  Boston has excellent hands and he wins contested balls.  Red Zone--giving TMac someone on the other side of the field with the sure-handed Coker inside.  What Cosell says later (about Hurst, actually, but it applies to Concepcion): "You can teach guys to catch a ball."   He talks about Concepcion, Boston, and Cooper in succession.  I get the feeling he is less impressed with Cooper than others are because he questions the competition--based on the Indiana system vs. zone etc.  I would also say that any WR who has a good WR on the other side of the field probably gets less defensive attention. I should add that this also reflects poorly on XL, but I have said he would be a late bloomer.  I had no idea how much he did not know about football.  We shall see, but can you imaging how potent we'd be in 4 WR sets if he comes around?  How do you cover that?  (OT people are biting their lips right now) THE DRAFT It sure looks as though the Panthers are looking seriously at WR (the Z spot specifically) in the draft.  Can you see any other position that has garnered this much attention for potential day 1 players?  I cannot.   I am concerned about the OT situation, don't get me wrong, but Morgan is going to think, "I have a starter and I brought in a swing T (Forsythe).  Moton is a real concern.  We may look at RT later--and I know how others feel about it.  We could re-sign BC and he would be available after a month or two....I dunno. Less than 2 weeks to go--just thought I would take a look at WR because it seems, based on available "evidence," that a WR will be our pick....again.  
×
×
  • Create New...